Nov 3, 2006 at 7:34 PM by Political Chase
I believe I should retract my previous statement regarding Ted Haggard’s influence on the Bush administration. I must admit Mr. Haggard historically has not been at the top of my list of notables to track closely. After some additional research, I have found that Haggard had substantial influence within the Oval Office. Notwithstanding Haggard’s close relationship with Karl Rove and the President. at this juncture I do not see this scandal as having grave consequences.
Publishing “WMD’s for Dummies” on the Internet — now that’s a different story.
Nov 3, 2006 at 7:19 PM by Political Chase
The military publications, Air Force Times, Army Times, et al, will collectively publish an editorial Monday calling for the resignation Rumsfeld.
The editorial, released to NBC News on Friday ahead of its Monday publication date, stated, “It is one thing for the majority of Americans to think Rumsfeld has failed. But when the nation’s current military leaders start to break publicly with their defense secretary, then it is clear that he is losing control of the institution he ostensibly leads.”
As I understand it, the family of publications are the primary news source for military service personnel.
Heckuva job Rummy.
Nov 3, 2006 at 6:30 PM by Political Chase
I mentioned earlier this week that the Republicans dropped $300,000 in Sen. Conrad Burns’ (Montana) pocket. Guess where it went?
This new ad, “Brokeback Montana,” is must-see-TV. Don’t miss the subtlety at the beginning, “They just can’t fight their nature.”
Albert Einstein said, “Whoever undertakes to set himself up as judge in the field of truth and knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods.”
Late Update: I discovered on 6/23/07 that YouTube removed the video from their site and published this statement, “This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.”
Nov 3, 2006 at 4:25 PM by Political Chase
After he has royally screwed Iraq up, President Bush now wants someone to come in and do his job for him? The man has lost it…he is telling Democrats to do his job! It sounds like it is a little hot in the kitchen. Please, step aside today and allow someone competent to drive the bus.
President Bush, campaigning to get out the Republican vote in Tuesday’s midterm elections, challenged Democrats today to produce a “plan for success” in Iraq instead of leveling only “harsh criticism.”
Nov 3, 2006 at 4:08 PM by Political Chase
What is so important about Ted Haggard’s indiscretions? My news aggregator picked up 32 hits on Ted Haggard and one on Stuart Bowen. What is wrong with that picture?
Bowen, the Special Inspector General for Reconstruction in Iraq, gets covertly canned by the administration and the Republican Congress because he did his job - blowing the whistle on Haliburton, et al.
Haggard’s personal life has been sufficiently ruined and it has zero, zip, nada impact on running the affairs of this nation and its interest.
Priorites and respect. Haggard’s situation is personal. Bowen and a ton of other things should be part of the public discourse, especially since we are less than four days away from critical elections.
Nov 3, 2006 at 3:19 PM by Political Chase
Tom Friedman of The New York Times articulates one of the best descriptions on the genius of Karl Rove I have ever read.
If you have not read the piece, this brief summary may help set the stage properly. Friedman begins his column by pointing out that George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld (”The Big Three”) think we are all “stupid.” He suggests the notion of “our stupidity” is derived from the The Big Three going ballistic over John Kerry’s remarks earlier this week (you know how I feel about that). Friedman urges, “Every time you hear Mr. Bush or Mr. Cheney lash out against Mr. Kerry, I hope you will say to yourself, ‘They must think I’m stupid.’ Because they surely do.” After a bit of Big Three bashing (the truly stupid people per Friedman), Friedman illuminates Rove’s brilliance.
Everyone says that Karl Rove is a genius. Yeah, right. So are cigarette companies. They get you to buy cigarettes even though we know they cause cancer. That is the kind of genius Karl Rove is. He is not a man who has designed a strategy to reunite our country around an agenda of renewal for the 21st century — to bring out the best in us. His “genius” is taking some irrelevant aside by John Kerry and twisting it to bring out the worst in us, so you will ignore the mess that the Bush team has visited on this country.
And Karl Rove has succeeded at that in the past because he was sure that he could sell just enough Bush cigarettes, even though people knew they caused cancer. Please, please, for our country’s health, prove him wrong this time.
Let Karl know that you’re not stupid. Let him know that you know that the most patriotic thing to do in this election is to vote against an administration that has — through sheer incompetence — brought us to a point in Iraq that was not inevitable but is now unwinnable.
Cigarettes - what a great analogy.
Nov 3, 2006 at 10:08 AM by Political Chase
There has been considerable debate over whether this election will be a referendum on President Bush (the Democratic wish), or simply local elections on a given state or district’s candidates (the Republican wish). I foresee the election will be an overwhelming referendum on George Bush; however I believe the local factors are a considerable risk. Not because of the local candidates, but the efficiency and accuracy of the voting methods, particularly in neck-to-neck campaigns, as in Virginia and Ohio.
First, the Bush factor. All polls, regardless of pollster, have the President looking up from the bottom of a very deep hole, but he carries a shovel instead of a rope. Alex Simendinger of The National Journal has a good grasp on the President and his affect on this election.
President Bush has been acting out the truth of his frequent boasts that he doesn’t govern by polls. The evidence? Bush’s actions heading toward an election that even Republicans predict will, under the best case, weaken their grip on Congress and complicate Bush’s lingering hopes to build on his legacy.
On Iraq, immigration, and Social Security — issues on which the polls say Americans give Bush poor marks — the president has unrepentantly marched to his own drummer, to the delight of most Democrats and the consternation of many Republicans. His party’s candidates wish Bush would restrict his commentary to the economy, fighting terrorism, and the opposing party’s warts. On the campaign trail, Bush has taken the long view with talk of big transformations, at a time when dozens of Republican candidates fret that the public’s unease about Bush may cost them their own futures.
The most significant considerations of Americans, and clearly the most telling, are the responses given to a few (of many) questions in the recent New York Times/CBS poll.
In summary: (1) the issues - not family values, candidate characteristics, etc. - are by far the voters’ motivation; (2) Iraq is the most significant issue - more than twice as important as any other issue; (3) the President ultimately bears responsibility for the war in Iraq and only 29% of the people approve of Bush’s management of the situation in Iraq; (4) only 29% of the people believe the country is on the right track, which speaks directly to leadership (or its absence); and (5) by more than 18 points, people will vote Democratic, which does not include a possible swing vote of 13 points. Even if all the potential swing votes went to the Republicans, it is not enough to carry a majority.
The Republican Congress has arguably rubber-stamped the President’s agenda for almost six years. Any dissension that exists between Republicans is negligible and has only risen within the past two months. Incumbent Republicans cannot run from their long standing commitment to the President’s agenda. Too little, too late, and Americans don’t trust the existing Congress enough to believe pre-election rhetoric. Moreover, the campaigns have focused on mudslinging and not the issues.
This election is about the President’s agenda, his historical performance, and his supporters (past, present and future). Hard cold evidence - scientifically based numbers - provide undeniable proof. Moreover, the evidence is repeatable and has been for a long time; this isn’t about a short-term peak or valley. And, the President is not going to change as demonstrated by his recent statements of allegiance to Rumsfeld and Cheney, and illustrated by Simendinger.
From the Times poll:
(Asked of likely voters) If the 2006 election for U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate in your district?
All Rep Dem Ind
Republican 34% 84% 3% 23%
Democratic 52 6 90 50
Other (vol.) 1 1 1 1
Won't vote (vol.) 0 0 0 0
Depends (vol.) 5 5 2 10
Don't know/NA 8 4 4 16
(Asked of likely voters who will vote for a Republican or a Democrat in November) What’s the main reason you’re supporting your candidate: 1. His or her personal qualities, or 2. His or her stands on the issues, or 3. Because he or she is a Republican/Democrat?
All Rep Dem Ind
Personal qualities 8% 10% 7% 6%
Issues 61 67 49 71
Party ID 27 19 40 16
Don't know/NA 4 4 4 7
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?
All Rep Dem Ind
Approve 34% 78% 7% 28%
Disapprove 58 13 91 60
Don't know/NA 8 9 2 12
Do you feel things in this country are generally going in the right direction or do you feel things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?
All Rep Dem Ind
Right direction 29% 62% 11% 23%
Wrong track 64 30 87 67
Don't know/NA 7 8 2 10
(Asked of likely voters) Of all the problems facing this country today, which one do you most want the new Congress to concentrate on first?
All Rep Dem Ind
War in Iraq 39% 25% 53% 36%
Illegal immigration 9 15 3 10
Economy and jobs 7 4 6 10
Defense/Military 5 8 4 5
Health care 5 2 8 5
Terrorism (general) 5 10 1 4
Education 2 1 2 2
Foreign policy 2 1 2 2
Taxes/IRS 2 2 1 1
Environment 2 3 1 1
Other 15 22 14 15
Don't know/NA 7 7 5 9
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling foreign policy?
All Rep Dem Ind
Approve 31% 70% 8% 25%
Disapprove 58 22 84 60
Don't know/NA 11 8 8 15
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?
All Rep Dem Ind
Approve 29% 68% 7% 21%
Disapprove 64 26 90 67
Don't know/NA 7 6 3 12
Given the above, the climate of American sentiment is easily quantifiable and logical. However, regardless of the persuasions of the American people, if the process to collect votes is flawed, the sentiment of the people be damned. The results lie directly within the performance and security of a plethora of new voting machines, which are either new and not tested, or recently implemented and proven to significant failure rates. Entire machines (many) have failed and all ballots casts in a single machine were lost leaving no audit trail. A single machine can record hundreds or thousands of votes.
For example, the Senatorial race in Virginia and Ohio is literally tied (as of last night). A few machine failures or even a few votes can easily change key races and the course of the country. The 2004 governor’s race in Washington state was ultimately decided by 133 votes out of 2.8 million cast.
I am convinced the President, his minions, and supporters in Congress will be rebuked, but getting it to stick has the potential to be a national nightmare.
